Develop Reference

How to change values of a specific pandas dateframe column of rows with duplicate IDs, and put those multiple values into 1 value on 1 row with commas [duplicate]

I have a pandas data frame df like:
a b
A 1
A 2
B 5
B 5
B 4
C 6
I want to group by the first column and get second column as lists in rows:
A [1,2]
B [5,5,4]
C [6]
Is it possible to do something like this using pandas groupby?

You can do this using groupby to group on the column of interest and then apply list to every group:
In [1]: df = pd.DataFrame( {'a':['A','A','B','B','B','C'], 'b':[1,2,5,5,4,6]})
df
Out[1]:
a b
0 A 1
1 A 2
2 B 5
3 B 5
4 B 4
5 C 6
In [2]: df.groupby('a')['b'].apply(list)
Out[2]:
a
A [1, 2]
B [5, 5, 4]
C [6]
Name: b, dtype: object
In [3]: df1 = df.groupby('a')['b'].apply(list).reset_index(name='new')
df1
Out[3]:
a new
0 A [1, 2]
1 B [5, 5, 4]
2 C [6]

A handy way to achieve this would be:
df.groupby('a').agg({'b':lambda x: list(x)})
Look into writing Custom Aggregations: https://www.kaggle.com/akshaysehgal/how-to-group-by-aggregate-using-py

If performance is important go down to numpy level:
import numpy as np
df = pd.DataFrame({'a': np.random.randint(0, 60, 600), 'b': [1, 2, 5, 5, 4, 6]*100})
def f(df):
keys, values = df.sort_values('a').values.T
ukeys, index = np.unique(keys, True)
arrays = np.split(values, index[1:])
df2 = pd.DataFrame({'a':ukeys, 'b':[list(a) for a in arrays]})
return df2
Tests:
In [301]: %timeit f(df)
1000 loops, best of 3: 1.64 ms per loop
In [302]: %timeit df.groupby('a')['b'].apply(list)
100 loops, best of 3: 5.26 ms per loop

To solve this for several columns of a dataframe:
In [5]: df = pd.DataFrame( {'a':['A','A','B','B','B','C'], 'b':[1,2,5,5,4,6],'c'
...: :[3,3,3,4,4,4]})
In [6]: df
Out[6]:
a b c
0 A 1 3
1 A 2 3
2 B 5 3
3 B 5 4
4 B 4 4
5 C 6 4
In [7]: df.groupby('a').agg(lambda x: list(x))
Out[7]:
b c
a
A [1, 2] [3, 3]
B [5, 5, 4] [3, 4, 4]
C [6] [4]
This answer was inspired from Anamika Modi's answer. Thank you!

Use any of the following groupby and agg recipes.
# Setup
df = pd.DataFrame({
'a': ['A', 'A', 'B', 'B', 'B', 'C'],
'b': [1, 2, 5, 5, 4, 6],
'c': ['x', 'y', 'z', 'x', 'y', 'z']
})
df
a b c
0 A 1 x
1 A 2 y
2 B 5 z
3 B 5 x
4 B 4 y
5 C 6 z
To aggregate multiple columns as lists, use any of the following:
df.groupby('a').agg(list)
df.groupby('a').agg(pd.Series.tolist)
b c
a
A [1, 2] [x, y]
B [5, 5, 4] [z, x, y]
C [6] [z]
To group-listify a single column only, convert the groupby to a SeriesGroupBy object, then call SeriesGroupBy.agg. Use,
df.groupby('a').agg({'b': list}) # 4.42 ms
df.groupby('a')['b'].agg(list) # 2.76 ms - faster
a
A [1, 2]
B [5, 5, 4]
C [6]
Name: b, dtype: object

As you were saying the groupby method of a pd.DataFrame object can do the job.
Example
L = ['A','A','B','B','B','C']
N = [1,2,5,5,4,6]
import pandas as pd
df = pd.DataFrame(zip(L,N),columns = list('LN'))
groups = df.groupby(df.L)
groups.groups
{'A': [0, 1], 'B': [2, 3, 4], 'C': [5]}
which gives and index-wise description of the groups.
To get elements of single groups, you can do, for instance
groups.get_group('A')
L N
0 A 1
1 A 2
groups.get_group('B')
L N
2 B 5
3 B 5
4 B 4

It is time to use agg instead of apply .
When
df = pd.DataFrame( {'a':['A','A','B','B','B','C'], 'b':[1,2,5,5,4,6], 'c': [1,2,5,5,4,6]})
If you want multiple columns stack into list , result in pd.DataFrame
df.groupby('a')[['b', 'c']].agg(list)
# or
df.groupby('a').agg(list)
If you want single column in list, result in ps.Series
df.groupby('a')['b'].agg(list)
#or
df.groupby('a')['b'].apply(list)
Note, result in pd.DataFrame is about 10x slower than result in ps.Series when you only aggregate single column, use it in multicolumns case .

Just a suplement. pandas.pivot_table is much more universal and seems more convenient：
"""data"""
df = pd.DataFrame( {'a':['A','A','B','B','B','C'],
'b':[1,2,5,5,4,6],
'c':[1,2,1,1,1,6]})
print(df)
a b c
0 A 1 1
1 A 2 2
2 B 5 1
3 B 5 1
4 B 4 1
5 C 6 6
"""pivot_table"""
pt = pd.pivot_table(df,
values=['b', 'c'],
index='a',
aggfunc={'b': list,
'c': set})
print(pt)
b c
a
A [1, 2] {1, 2}
B [5, 5, 4] {1}
C [6] {6}

If looking for a unique list while grouping multiple columns this could probably help:
df.groupby('a').agg(lambda x: list(set(x))).reset_index()

Building upon #B.M answer, here is a more general version and updated to work with newer library version: (numpy version 1.19.2, pandas version 1.2.1)
And this solution can also deal with multi-indices:
However this is not heavily tested, use with caution.
If performance is important go down to numpy level:
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
np.random.seed(0)
df = pd.DataFrame({'a': np.random.randint(0, 10, 90), 'b': [1,2,3]*30, 'c':list('abcefghij')*10, 'd': list('hij')*30})
def f_multi(df,col_names):
if not isinstance(col_names,list):
col_names = [col_names]
values = df.sort_values(col_names).values.T
col_idcs = [df.columns.get_loc(cn) for cn in col_names]
other_col_names = [name for idx, name in enumerate(df.columns) if idx not in col_idcs]
other_col_idcs = [df.columns.get_loc(cn) for cn in other_col_names]
# split df into indexing colums(=keys) and data colums(=vals)
keys = values[col_idcs,:]
vals = values[other_col_idcs,:]
# list of tuple of key pairs
multikeys = list(zip(*keys))
# remember unique key pairs and ther indices
ukeys, index = np.unique(multikeys, return_index=True, axis=0)
# split data columns according to those indices
arrays = np.split(vals, index[1:], axis=1)
# resulting list of subarrays has same number of subarrays as unique key pairs
# each subarray has the following shape:
# rows = number of non-grouped data columns
# cols = number of data points grouped into that unique key pair
# prepare multi index
idx = pd.MultiIndex.from_arrays(ukeys.T, names=col_names)
list_agg_vals = dict()
for tup in zip(*arrays, other_col_names):
col_vals = tup[:-1] # first entries are the subarrays from above
col_name = tup[-1] # last entry is data-column name
list_agg_vals[col_name] = col_vals
df2 = pd.DataFrame(data=list_agg_vals, index=idx)
return df2
Tests:
In [227]: %timeit f_multi(df, ['a','d'])
2.54 ms ± 64.7 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
In [228]: %timeit df.groupby(['a','d']).agg(list)
4.56 ms ± 61.5 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
Results:
for the random seed 0 one would get:

The easiest way I have found to achieve the same thing, at least for one column, which is similar to Anamika's answer, just with the tuple syntax for the aggregate function.
df.groupby('a').agg(b=('b','unique'), c=('c','unique'))

Let us using df.groupby with list and Series constructor
pd.Series({x : y.b.tolist() for x , y in df.groupby('a')})
Out[664]:
A [1, 2]
B [5, 5, 4]
C [6]
dtype: object

Here I have grouped elements with "|" as a separator
import pandas as pd
df = pd.read_csv('input.csv')
df
Out[1]:
Area Keywords
0 A 1
1 A 2
2 B 5
3 B 5
4 B 4
5 C 6
df.dropna(inplace = True)
df['Area']=df['Area'].apply(lambda x:x.lower().strip())
print df.columns
df_op = df.groupby('Area').agg({"Keywords":lambda x : "|".join(x)})
df_op.to_csv('output.csv')
Out[2]:
df_op
Area Keywords
A [1| 2]
B [5| 5| 4]
C [6]

Answer based on #EdChum's comment on his answer. Comment is this -
groupby is notoriously slow and memory hungry, what you could do is sort by column A, then find the idxmin and idxmax (probably store this in a dict) and use this to slice your dataframe would be faster I think
Let's first create a dataframe with 500k categories in first column and total df shape 20 million as mentioned in question.
df = pd.DataFrame(columns=['a', 'b'])
df['a'] = (np.random.randint(low=0, high=500000, size=(20000000,))).astype(str)
df['b'] = list(range(20000000))
print(df.shape)
df.head()
# Sort data by first column
df.sort_values(by=['a'], ascending=True, inplace=True)
df.reset_index(drop=True, inplace=True)
# Create a temp column
df['temp_idx'] = list(range(df.shape[0]))
# Take all values of b in a separate list
all_values_b = list(df.b.values)
print(len(all_values_b))
# For each category in column a, find min and max indexes
gp_df = df.groupby(['a']).agg({'temp_idx': [np.min, np.max]})
gp_df.reset_index(inplace=True)
gp_df.columns = ['a', 'temp_idx_min', 'temp_idx_max']
# Now create final list_b column, using min and max indexes for each category of a and filtering list of b.
gp_df['list_b'] = gp_df[['temp_idx_min', 'temp_idx_max']].apply(lambda x: all_values_b[x[0]:x[1]+1], axis=1)
print(gp_df.shape)
gp_df.head()
This above code takes 2 minutes for 20 million rows and 500k categories in first column.

Sorting consumes O(nlog(n)) time which is the most time consuming operation in the solutions suggested above
For a simple solution (containing single column) pd.Series.to_list would work and can be considered more efficient unless considering other frameworks
e.g.
import pandas as pd
from string import ascii_lowercase
import random
def generate_string(case=4):
return ''.join([random.choice(ascii_lowercase) for _ in range(case)])
df = pd.DataFrame({'num_val':[random.randint(0,100) for _ in range(20000000)],'string_val':[generate_string() for _ in range(20000000)]})
%timeit df.groupby('string_val').agg({'num_val':pd.Series.to_list})
For 20 million records it takes about 17.2 seconds. compared to apply(list) which takes about 19.2 and lambda function which takes about 20.6s

Just to add up to previous answers, In my case, I want the list and other functions like min and max. The way to do that is:
df = pd.DataFrame({
'a':['A','A','B','B','B','C'],
'b':[1,2,5,5,4,6]
})
df=df.groupby('a').agg({
'b':['min', 'max',lambda x: list(x)]
})
#then flattening and renaming if necessary
df.columns = df.columns.to_flat_index()
df.rename(columns={('b', 'min'): 'b_min', ('b', 'max'): 'b_max', ('b', '<lambda_0>'): 'b_list'},inplace=True)

It's a bit old but I was directed here. Is there anyway to group it by multiple different columns?
"column1", "column2", "column3"
"foo", "val1", 3
"foo", "val2", 0
"foo", "val2", 3
"bar", "other", 99
to this:
"column1", "column2", "column3"
"foo", "val1", [ 3 ]
"foo", "val2", [ 0, 3 ]
"bar", "other", [ 99 ]

Appending column values from one dataframe to another as a list

I have dozens of very similar dataFrames. What I want is to combine all 'VALUE' column values from each into lists, and return a dataFrame where the 'VALUE' column is comprised of these lists. I only want to do this for rows where 'PV' contains a substring from a list of substrings.
I came up with one way I thought would work, but it's real nasty and doesn't work anyways (stopped it at 3m). There has to be a better way of doing this, does anyone here have any ideas? Thanks for any and all help.
import pandas as np
# Example dataFrames
df0 = pd.DataFrame(data={'PV': ['pv1', 'pv2', 'pv3', 'pv4'], 'VALUE': [1, 2, 3, 4]})
df1 = pd.DataFrame(data={'PV': ['pv1', 'pv2', 'pv3', 'pv4'], 'VALUE': [5, 6, 7, 8]})
df2 = pd.DataFrame(data={'PV': ['pv1', 'pv2', 'pv3', 'pv4'], 'VALUE': [10, 11, 12, 13]})
DATAFRAMES
df0 dataFrame df1 dataFrame df2 dataFrame
PV VALUE PV VALUE PV VALUE
pv1 1 pv1 5 pv1 10
pv2 2 pv2 6 pv2 11
pv3 3 pv3 7 pv3 12
pv4 4 pv4 8 pv4 13
# Nasty code I thought might work
strings = ['v2', 'v4']
for i, row0 in df0.iterrows():
for j, row1 in df1.iterrows():
if (row0['PV']==row1['PV']) & any(substring in row0['PV'] for substring in strings):
df0.at[i,'VALUE'] = [row0['VALUE'], row1['VALUE']]
Desired result:
PV VALUE
pv1 1
pv2 [2,6]
pv3 3
pv4 [4,8]
#enke thank you for your help! I had to play with it a bit to figure out how to keep nested lists from occurring, and ended up using the following commented function/code/output:
def appendValues(df0, df1, pvStrings=['v2','v4']):
# Turn values in VALUE column into list objects
df0['VALUE'] = df0['VALUE'].apply(lambda x: x if isinstance(x,list) else [x])
# For rows were PV string DOESN'T contain substring, set value to max()+1
# apply makes lists [x] empty if they were set to max()+1, else [x]
df1['VALUE'] = (df1['VALUE']
.where(df1['PV'].str.contains('|'.join(pvStrings)), df1['VALUE'].max()+1)
.apply(lambda x: [x] if x <= df1['VALUE'].max() else []))
# concatenate df1's VALUE column to df0
# set the indexing column to 'PV'
# sum all row values (axis=1) into one list
data = (df0.merge(df1, on='PV')
.set_index('PV')
.sum(axis=1))
# restore singleton lists to their original type, reset index moves current 'PV' index back to a column, and impliments new sequential index
data = data.mask(data.str.len().eq(1), data.str[0]).reset_index(name='VALUE')
return data
data = appendValues(df0, df1, pvStrings=['v2','v4'])
data = appendValues(data, df2, pvStrings=['v1','v4'])
data
Output:
PV VALUE
0 pv1 [1,10]
1 pv2 [2,6]
2 pv3 3
3 pv4 [4,8,13]

You could filter df1 for rows that contain strings; concatenate it with df0; then groupby + agg(list) can aggregate "VALUE"s for each "PV".
Finally, you could use mask to take out the elements from the singleton lists.
out = (pd.concat([df0, df1[df1['PV'].str.contains('|'.join(strings))]])
.groupby('PV', as_index=False)['VALUE'].agg(list))
out['VALUE'] = out['VALUE'].mask(out['VALUE'].str.len().eq(1), out['VALUE'].str[0])
Alternatively, we could make the values in the "VALUE" columns lists and merge + concatenate the lists:
df0['VALUE'] = df0['VALUE'].apply(lambda x: [x])
df1['VALUE'] = df1['VALUE'].where(df1['PV'].str.contains('|'.join(strings)), df1['VALUE'].max()+1).apply(lambda x: [x] if x <= df1['VALUE'].max() else [])
out = df0.merge(df1, on='PV').set_index('PV').sum(axis=1)
out = out.mask(out.str.len().eq(1), out.str[0]).reset_index(name='VALUE')
Output:
PV VALUE
0 pv1 1
1 pv2 [2, 6]
2 pv3 3
3 pv4 [4, 8]
If you don't want to filter out the rows that contain "strings" in "PV" but rather keep them as separate rows, then you could concat + groupby first; then filter + explode:
out = pd.concat([df0, df1]).groupby('PV', as_index=False)['VALUE'].agg(list)
msk = out['PV'].str.contains('|'.join(strings))
out = pd.concat((out[msk].explode('VALUE'), out[~msk])).sort_index()
Output:
PV VALUE
0 pv1 [1, 5]
1 pv2 2
1 pv2 6
2 pv3 [3, 7]
3 pv4 4
3 pv4 8

How to reorder columns based on regex?

Let's say I have a dataframe like this:
df = pd.DataFrame({'foo':[1, 2], 'bar': [3, 4], 'xyz': [5, 6]})
bar foo xyz
0 3 1 5
1 4 2 6
I now want to put the column that contains oo at the first position (i.e. at 0th index); there is always only one column with this pattern.
I currently solve this using filter twice and a concat:
pd.concat([df.filter(like='oo'), df.filter(regex='^((?!(oo)).)*$')], axis=1)
which gives the desired output:
foo bar xyz
0 1 3 5
1 2 4 6
I am wondering whether there is a more efficient way of doing this.

Use list comprehensions only, join lists together and select by subset:
a = [x for x in df.columns if 'oo' in x]
b = [x for x in df.columns if not 'oo' in x]
df = df[a + b]
print (df)
foo bar xyz
0 1 3 5
1 2 4 6

What about:
df[sorted(df, key = lambda x: x not in df.filter(like="oo").columns)]

Using pop:
cols = list(df)
col_oo = [col for col in df.columns if 'oo' in col]
cols.insert(0, cols.pop(cols.index(col_oo[0])))
df = df.ix[:, cols]
Or using regex:
col_oo = [col for col in cols if re.search('oo', col)]

pandas - Apply mean to a specific row in grouped dataframe [duplicate]

This should be straightforward, but the closest thing I've found is this post:
pandas: Filling missing values within a group, and I still can't solve my problem....
Suppose I have the following dataframe
df = pd.DataFrame({'value': [1, np.nan, np.nan, 2, 3, 1, 3, np.nan, 3], 'name': ['A','A', 'B','B','B','B', 'C','C','C']})
name value
0 A 1
1 A NaN
2 B NaN
3 B 2
4 B 3
5 B 1
6 C 3
7 C NaN
8 C 3
and I'd like to fill in "NaN" with mean value in each "name" group, i.e.
name value
0 A 1
1 A 1
2 B 2
3 B 2
4 B 3
5 B 1
6 C 3
7 C 3
8 C 3
I'm not sure where to go after:
grouped = df.groupby('name').mean()
Thanks a bunch.

One way would be to use transform:
>>> df
name value
0 A 1
1 A NaN
2 B NaN
3 B 2
4 B 3
5 B 1
6 C 3
7 C NaN
8 C 3
>>> df["value"] = df.groupby("name").transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))
>>> df
name value
0 A 1
1 A 1
2 B 2
3 B 2
4 B 3
5 B 1
6 C 3
7 C 3
8 C 3

fillna + groupby + transform + mean
This seems intuitive:
df['value'] = df['value'].fillna(df.groupby('name')['value'].transform('mean'))
The groupby + transform syntax maps the groupwise mean to the index of the original dataframe. This is roughly equivalent to #DSM's solution, but avoids the need to define an anonymous lambda function.

#DSM has IMO the right answer, but I'd like to share my generalization and optimization of the question: Multiple columns to group-by and having multiple value columns:
df = pd.DataFrame(
{
'category': ['X', 'X', 'X', 'X', 'X', 'X', 'Y', 'Y', 'Y'],
'name': ['A','A', 'B','B','B','B', 'C','C','C'],
'other_value': [10, np.nan, np.nan, 20, 30, 10, 30, np.nan, 30],
'value': [1, np.nan, np.nan, 2, 3, 1, 3, np.nan, 3],
}
)
... gives ...
category name other_value value
0 X A 10.0 1.0
1 X A NaN NaN
2 X B NaN NaN
3 X B 20.0 2.0
4 X B 30.0 3.0
5 X B 10.0 1.0
6 Y C 30.0 3.0
7 Y C NaN NaN
8 Y C 30.0 3.0
In this generalized case we would like to group by category and name, and impute only on value.
This can be solved as follows:
df['value'] = df.groupby(['category', 'name'])['value']\
.transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))
Notice the column list in the group-by clause, and that we select the value column right after the group-by. This makes the transformation only be run on that particular column. You could add it to the end, but then you will run it for all columns only to throw out all but one measure column at the end. A standard SQL query planner might have been able to optimize this, but pandas (0.19.2) doesn't seem to do this.
Performance test by increasing the dataset by doing ...
big_df = None
for _ in range(10000):
if big_df is None:
big_df = df.copy()
else:
big_df = pd.concat([big_df, df])
df = big_df
... confirms that this increases the speed proportional to how many columns you don't have to impute:
import pandas as pd
from datetime import datetime
def generate_data():
...
t = datetime.now()
df = generate_data()
df['value'] = df.groupby(['category', 'name'])['value']\
.transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))
print(datetime.now()-t)
# 0:00:00.016012
t = datetime.now()
df = generate_data()
df["value"] = df.groupby(['category', 'name'])\
.transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))['value']
print(datetime.now()-t)
# 0:00:00.030022
On a final note you can generalize even further if you want to impute more than one column, but not all:
df[['value', 'other_value']] = df.groupby(['category', 'name'])['value', 'other_value']\
.transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))

Shortcut:
Groupby + Apply + Lambda + Fillna + Mean
>>> df['value1']=df.groupby('name')['value'].apply(lambda x:x.fillna(x.mean()))
>>> df.isnull().sum().sum()
0
This solution still works if you want to group by multiple columns to replace missing values.
>>> df = pd.DataFrame({'value': [1, np.nan, np.nan, 2, 3, np.nan,np.nan, 4, 3],
'name': ['A','A', 'B','B','B','B', 'C','C','C'],'class':list('ppqqrrsss')})
>>> df['value']=df.groupby(['name','class'])['value'].apply(lambda x:x.fillna(x.mean()))
>>> df
value name class
0 1.0 A p
1 1.0 A p
2 2.0 B q
3 2.0 B q
4 3.0 B r
5 3.0 B r
6 3.5 C s
7 4.0 C s
8 3.0 C s

I'd do it this way
df.loc[df.value.isnull(), 'value'] = df.groupby('group').value.transform('mean')

The featured high ranked answer only works for a pandas Dataframe with only two columns. If you have a more columns case use instead:
df['Crude_Birth_rate'] = df.groupby("continent").Crude_Birth_rate.transform(
lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))

To summarize all above concerning the efficiency of the possible solution
I have a dataset with 97 906 rows and 48 columns.
I want to fill in 4 columns with the median of each group.
The column I want to group has 26 200 groups.
The first solution
start = time.time()
x = df_merged[continuous_variables].fillna(df_merged.groupby('domain_userid')[continuous_variables].transform('median'))
print(time.time() - start)
0.10429811477661133 seconds
The second solution
start = time.time()
for col in continuous_variables:
df_merged.loc[df_merged[col].isnull(), col] = df_merged.groupby('domain_userid')[col].transform('median')
print(time.time() - start)
0.5098445415496826 seconds
The next solution I only performed on a subset since it was running too long.
start = time.time()
for col in continuous_variables:
x = df_merged.head(10000).groupby('domain_userid')[col].transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.median()))
print(time.time() - start)
11.685635566711426 seconds
The following solution follows the same logic as above.
start = time.time()
x = df_merged.head(10000).groupby('domain_userid')[continuous_variables].transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.median()))
print(time.time() - start)
42.630549907684326 seconds
So it's quite important to choose the right method.
Bear in mind that I noticed once a column was not a numeric the times were going up exponentially (makes sense as I was computing the median).

def groupMeanValue(group):
group['value'] = group['value'].fillna(group['value'].mean())
return group
dft = df.groupby("name").transform(groupMeanValue)

I know that is an old question. But I am quite surprised by the unanimity of apply/lambda answers here.
Generally speaking, that is the second worst thing to do after iterating rows, from timing point of view.
What I would do here is
df.loc[df['value'].isna(), 'value'] = df.groupby('name')['value'].transform('mean')
Or using fillna
df['value'] = df['value'].fillna(df.groupby('name')['value'].transform('mean'))
I've checked with timeit (because, again, unanimity for apply/lambda based solution made me doubt my instinct). And that is indeed 2.5 faster than the most upvoted solutions.

To fill all the numeric null values with the mean grouped by "name"
num_cols = df.select_dtypes(exclude='object').columns
df[num_cols] = df.groupby("name").transform(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean()))

df.fillna(df.groupby(['name'], as_index=False).mean(), inplace=True)

You can also use "dataframe or table_name".apply(lambda x: x.fillna(x.mean())).

Map function across multi-column DataFrame

Given a DataFrame like the following
In [1]: import pandas as pd
In [2]: df = pd.DataFrame({'x': [1, 2, 3, 4], 'y': [4, 3, 2, 1]})
I would like to map a row-wise function across its columns
In [3]: df.map(lambda (x, y): x + y)
and get something like the following
0 5
1 5
2 5
3 5
Name: None, dtype: int64
Is this possible?

You can apply a function row-wise by setting axis=1
df.apply(lambda row: row.x + row.y, axis=1)
Out[145]:
0 5
1 5
2 5
3 5
dtype: int64